PDA

View Full Version : next-gen XBox will use AMD 6000 series GPU


calintz
01-24-2012, 09:34 PM
The next-gen Xbox's GPU will derive from 2011's AMD 6000 series, similar to the Radeon HD 6670, which supports DirectX11, 1080p HD, multi-display output and 3D, IGN reports, citing sources close to the project. Mass production of its GPU will begin at the end of 2012, IGN says, with a full-console launch scheduled in October or November 2013.

With these specs, the next Xbox will have six times the processing power of the Xbox 360 and is expected to support performance 20 percent greater than Nintendo's Wii U, which is using the R770, a chip that is competitively stronger than the GPUs of both the Xbox 360 and PS3.

Previously uncovered Microsoft resumes listed gesture and voice input, which suggests some form of Kinect integration will be present in the coming Xbox model.
http://www.joystiq.com/2012/01/24/report-next-gen-xbox-to-launch-october-november-2013-with-this/

Kiuju2k
01-24-2012, 09:52 PM
Yeah well I figured as much, there is still a ton of content to be released. Microsoft will let the 360 ride as long as they can.

Good news.

Alucard
01-24-2012, 10:07 PM
So...its half the power of my 560Ti? If thats true then I'm extremely disappointed. Even the 460 is stronger, and that was outa couple years ago or so. Those supposed specs cant be right.

Badrats Studio
01-25-2012, 01:33 AM
Console is not about horsepower anyway. It's all about okay graphic by current standard and affordable price (comparing to PC).

Zack
01-25-2012, 01:37 AM
6670? very unlikely..

darren
01-25-2012, 06:39 AM
i hope this is bullshit

KingOfSentinels
01-25-2012, 07:27 AM
I'm hoping this is bullshit too, but, it's a sensible business decision if not. The Wii U having the GPU it does, Microsoft is playing it safe by staying relatively in the same power range. It it went much higher, which we all want, all costs would go up, for production and for developers. And if PS3 and Wii U were both cheaper, Xbox might lose a bit of love.

Doesn't mean I'm okay with it. But if this is true, I called it. It's got too much additional crap in it to stay competitively priced along with being powerful as shit. But I sincerely hope I'm wrong.

darren
01-25-2012, 09:00 AM
i have a horried fealing it is true .. and wouldnt expect much more if any mroe from sony either tbh ..

thank the lord for my 560ti .. which by the sounds of it is NEXT NEXT GEN ...LOL

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-01-25-next-xbox-gpu-based-on-50-radeon-hd-6670-card-report

Update: Digital Foundry editor Richard Leadbetter has offered his thoughts on Microsoft possibly opting for a Radeon HD 6670-like GPU in the next Xbox.

"If the GPU story is true, it suggests that Microsoft is placing price-point ahead of performance," Leadbetter said.

"By PC standards, the Radeon HD 6670 is an unremarkable, entry-level enthusiast product aimed more towards the home cinema PC audience. It struggles to run Battlefield 3 at 20 frames-per-second on high settings at 1080p, and could maybe hit 30FPS in Crysis 2 at the same resolution."

"In a closed box environment with custom modifications and a dedicated development platform to support it, the chip could achieve much greater things (360 dev kits initially shipped with unremarkable X800 graphics cards, before getting X1800/X1900 upgrades). But it would be a curious choice for a platform holder looking to sustain another lengthy console lifecycle."

Original story: The graphics card (GPU) inside the next Xbox will be "akin to" the 50 Radeon HD 6670, a new report has suggested.

IGN heard from "sources close to the project" that the GPU will provide performance six times greater than Xbox 360, and 20 per cent greater than Wii U.

A Radeon HD 6670 card supports DirectX 11, multi-display output, 3D and 1080p.

Development kits matching the final system configuration of the next Xbox will be sent out in August 2012, apparently. And mass production of the Radeon HD 6670-based GPU should begin by the end of 2012.
'Next Xbox GPU based on 50 Radeon HD 6670 card - report' Screenshot radeon

I wonder how small it will be.

The new console itself will ship to shops in late October or early November 2013, IGN wrote.

The release date and dev kit dates we've heard before. However, this is the most specific a report has been about the graphics card inside the next Xbox.

We heard late last year that Microsoft planned two versions of its next Xbox. Both will bundle Kinect, although one machine will be a cheap, "pared down" set-top box; the other a "more fully featured", typical new console for hardcore gamers.

Will this Radeon HD 6670-like GPU be fitted inside both models?

KingOfSentinels
01-25-2012, 09:55 AM
560Ti levels of power was something I expected them to at least match, same with everyone at work. Even under a 560Ti in raw power, after a year or so time it'll match it by then. Every single tech demo of this new Xbox we see will now look worse than Battlefield 3; oh wow, how exciting is that. Roll on the next generation!

I like how I was going to SLI my 460 to match the next generation and not fall behind. I don't even need to now. :P

eastx
01-25-2012, 10:08 AM
I hope they choose to boost the power... But affordability might really be their way in compared to the PS4; we'll see.

KingOfSentinels
01-25-2012, 10:39 AM
6670 can't even run Crysis.

Looking at benchmarks, it handles it at lower resolutions, high settings, and only manages barely 30 FPS.

eastx
01-25-2012, 10:44 AM
I think everything will run beautifully at 720P with this spec, but I was really expecting this gen to embrace 1080P. But again, it's just a rumor till proven true.

darren
01-25-2012, 10:46 AM
Not able to do 1080p native in the next systems is an epic fail tbh ...

Ps4 I suspect will be similar specs.



6670 can't even run Crysis.

Looking at benchmarks, it handles it at lower resolutions, high settings, and only manages barely 30 FPS.


It's a total waste of time looking at pc bench marks . Even if it is a 6670 it will be fine tuned, etc etc ... It would be more powerfull than a pc 6670 ..

KingOfSentinels
01-25-2012, 12:00 PM
It's not a waste of time at all, it's a good indication and as close as we can get until the console is in our homes. A 6670 in a PC runs Crysis at 720p, high, and less than 30 FPS. Microsoft won't sprinkle fairy dust onto it and suddenly it'll be running it 1080p, maximum, and 60 frames. Microsoft employees aren't Gandalf. I can imagine it'll handle it at a better framerate but it's not going to be massively better and suddenly be running it better.

I'm not saying that's exactly what it'll be doing. But it's as close an indicator as we have right now.

darren
01-25-2012, 12:25 PM
it is pointless .. they are utter chalk and cheese ..

you work for a games company yet dont realise that every gen the gpus in consoles always perform better than the pc counter parts? .. just look at the ps3/360 .. they clearly out perform whats under the hood due to the fact its a dedicated console with a gpu thats been tinkered with etc etc etc ..

this will be NO different .. it will 100% out perform a pc 6670 if true .. and like every (since you like italics so much ) gen by some way i would suspect

zechin
01-25-2012, 01:25 PM
It's true, Consoles are more closed platforms with particular specs that work differently architecture wise.

Nvidia and AMD design their GPUs completely different. In architecture they can tweak/customise the shit out of it as long as it gets the results. Even if it's a 6000 series it wouldn't be surprising to see it support dx11.1 if they wanted to implement it. Sometimes a direct comparison to a PC isn't fair or even that truthful. If it were a 6670, then that'd be shocking as it is no better than about 1-2 gens ago of PC graphics cards that underperform, just so you can play everything on low-medium at 1280x1028.

Seraph
01-25-2012, 01:26 PM
I was going to chime and and say something to that regard too. Consoles "specs" can't really be compared to their PC counterparts.

You could not build a PC with the specs of the current Xbox and run games at the same level.

Older consoles have processors in the double digit mhz.

progmetal
01-25-2012, 01:33 PM
According to Microsoft you needed a $2000 PC to be able to run the same games as the 360 when it was launched.

Lol, but you get the picture. There is a difference.

eastx
01-25-2012, 01:45 PM
New deets:

http://kotaku.com/5879202/sources-the-next-xbox-will-play-blu+ray-may-not-play-used-games-and-will-introduce-kinect-2

KingOfSentinels
01-25-2012, 02:05 PM
it is pointless .. they are utter chalk and cheese ..

you work for a games company yet dont realise that every gen the gpus in consoles always perform better than the pc counter parts? .. just look at the ps3/360 .. they clearly out perform whats under the hood due to the fact its a dedicated console with a gpu thats been tinkered with etc etc etc ..

this will be NO different .. it will 100% out perform a pc 6670 if true .. and like every (since you like italics so much ) gen by some way i would suspect

I know it will. Do you keep over-looking the bits where I say that?

A 6670 in a PC will of course not do as good as a console's 6670, I haven't once said that. But a 6670 for a console isn't magically going to be running hugely better graphics than Battlefield 3 maxed if the PC version has no chance of doing the same thing. PC hardware isn't that bad. So we can use them as a minimum benchmark.

You're all doing exactly the same thing even if you don't realise it, and so is every article and person commenting about this; so are you Darren, so is everyone, and thus I don't know why I'm suddenly being singled out about it. You're all gauging the power of this console against the PC version. That's the only frame of reference we have, so that's all we have to work with. I've not once said it's going to be exactly the same or worse than the PC version, and I gave the rest of you the benefit of the doubt that no one was doing that too.

So we look at 6670 benchmarks in order to do that. With a high-end i7 processor, 6GB RAM, it runs Crysis at medium resolutions, on high, and scrapes around 25 FPS. So we can roughly estimate what the next-gen consoles will be capable of from that, and use this benchmark as a minimum estimate, and make an educated guess at what it'll be capable of. And that's a minimum since, as I said, they will optimise as time goes on. It'll get better. I don't need people telling me this and be so condescending about it, I'm not a fucking retard, thanks.

darren
01-25-2012, 02:14 PM
Wtf are you Talking about? Doing the same as what..?.

I'm not singling anyone one out ..simply said you can't compare the two cards as they are utter chalk and cheese and the nextbox and ps4 will 100% be able to do crysis more than 25 fps. Ohh add an IMO to the previous post so you dont feel singled out.

If you don't like someone might question your opinion though really.

It's not a 6670 it's BASED on a 6670 .. Very very different things .. It could be a6670 with bits of 7000 series as well, some extra custom stuff etc etc etc, it will be built for the console totally custom

.. People you included talk like they are buying off the shelf pc hardware and slotting it in, they are not. Its all custom built by AMD it will be nothing like a pc 6670 .Which is why you can't compare them. Just have to look back over every single gen of consoles to see exactly the same thing

If it doesn't do much more than a 6670 it's kinda annoying As I would love to see more grunt .. But at the same time x6s more powerful than an xbox360 or ps3 is not to bad and tbh more than enough for then console market, just look how zwesoem drakes looks on 7 year old tech .. X6 times more powerful is probrbly plenty.

Long live my 560ti sli CFG..

KingOfSentinels
01-25-2012, 02:29 PM
Okay, well, when you commented earlier on your 560Ti being 'very very next gen' in comparison to this, what were you comparing it to? Since I'm 99% sure you roughly used a PC's 6670 to compare it to and come up with that, unless Microsoft has sneakily sent you the exact card they're using.

Alucard commented that his 560Ti is seemingly double the power of this. Again, since I'm guessing MS hasn't given him a prototype model of the Nextbox, I bet he used a 6670 for reference.

I gave you both the benefit of the doubt that you'd know this would be more powerful than a PC's 6670, since I know you're not morons, but I don't get that same luxury it seems?

Also, it doesn't necessarily mean that, since the article says "The next-gen Xbox's GPU will derive from 2011's AMD 6000 series, similar to the Radeon HD 6670." You can take from that it's not going to be leaps and bounds over a 6670 if it's similar to one. If it's a lot more powerful than a 6670, the Source would have said similar to a 6690, or however the ATI cards are numbered when they're more powerful. I have no idea.

It's power is around the 6670. I know they're not just going to jam in a 6670, but the card they do put in, by what the Source says, will be similar in power to it. Or could be. And that's not a very lovely prospect.

darren
01-25-2012, 02:32 PM
OR ... I might not give a poop and have said my 560 is next next gen for a chuckle

But I stand by

- you can't compare them
- no native 1080p on any next gen system is epic fail
- and the next gen system will way out perform the pc 6670 crysis bench marks

KingOfSentinels
01-25-2012, 02:35 PM
So then how do you know how powerful this thing is? Magic?

No. Like everyone, you're gauging it roughly from a PC's 6670s graphical power. As I said, that's the only reference we have right now, and that's exactly what everyone is doing. And don't come back saying this'll be more powerful, I know it will be, but it's the only thing we can use to estimate this thing's power to any degree.

darren
01-25-2012, 02:45 PM
I dont know but I'v been gaming for over 25 years and know that the GPUs have always way out performed what's under the hood compared to the pc counter part as they are custom builds for the consoles, as its always been the same . That is fact .. And why I can say that it will be more powerful with out even needing to magic myself into ms, Sony or Nintendo dev labs


New deets:

http://kotaku.com/5879202/sources-the-next-xbox-will-play-blu+ray-may-not-play-used-games-and-will-introduce-kinect-2

some interesting bits but IMO (need to be careful here)

The Next Xbox Will Play Blu-Ray - a given tbh
May Not Play Used Games - not a chance as it would mean online connection to register any game you buy, but i can see every game with online needing a code to play online, then having to pay 10 to play online if you buy a 2nd hand copy.
Will Introduce Kinect 2 - yes . but not day 1 .. kinect is clealy on a different cycle to the 360. i recon kinect 2 2-3 years after xbox3. so the can make more money getting people to replace kinect hardware 1/2 way through the next gen

KingOfSentinels
01-25-2012, 02:52 PM
Again, you've missed my point.

I know a console's 6670 is going to out-perform a PC's 6670, I've said that on every single post now and this is now the 5th time I've said it I think. I can imagine it'll run Crysis at 1080p with max graphics but I can't see it rocking 60+ frames while doing so. With a lot of tweaking it could give it a go, but, developers don't learn about hardware in a minute. So it'll take a few years of working with it before we'll get to those levels, if this is true.

But the only way I know that is because I, and so are you, and so is everybody else, are using the 6670 we have now as a rough benchmark. As a minimum benchmark. That's all we've got to go on, so that's all we can use.

I don't know why you keep missing that bit off and then just tell me it's going to be more powerful. I've agreed and said it will be about 5 times now.

darren
01-25-2012, 02:55 PM
sorry i answered your question, now your singling me out

KingOfSentinels
01-25-2012, 03:07 PM
Meh, sorry I was a bit ratty about it mate. Long day at work.

As for the new little tidbits of infomation, I agree with that being a bit far-fetched in regards to it not playing used videogames. It'll likely just integrate the online pass for games into XBL itself or something like that in order to prevent a bit of used game sales.

Also, if it hasn't already been posted, Wii U's power is rumoured to be twice that of the 360. Which is a big step up from the 50% originally rumoured.

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/333423/wii-u-is-twice-as-powerful-as-xbox-360-report/

I can't wait till we can stop discussing fucking rumours. Release the damn specs!

Investor27
01-25-2012, 03:14 PM
I'm not too worried about this report. There are still 4 months till E3, and plenty of time for more leaked information on the next Xbox.

I very much doubt that the next xbox will use this underpowered, antiquated chip. I am more inclined to believe that Microsoft is running counter-intelligent by spreading false propaganda to throw off Nintendo and Sony (their main competitors). The truth will come out at E3. :lol:

darren
01-25-2012, 03:16 PM
i could see xbox4/ps5 gen trying to stop the 2nd hand market as they are more likely to be media free .. or always/instant on networks etc whey they could possibly en force game registery

Northeastmonk
01-25-2012, 05:29 PM
http://fixandplay.com/uploads/image/xbox720realsteel.jpg
http://fixandplay.com/index.php?page=news&op=readNews&id=180&title=Xbox-720-Logo-Spotted-in-Real-Steel-trailer

huge internet buzz. XBox720 logo appeared in the movie Real Steel.

Not to mention the graphics card they're "using" looks to be cheap for production, yet I highly doubt it would be under the $400 price mark.

darren
01-25-2012, 05:46 PM
That 720 advert is really old isn't it?

KingOfSentinels
01-25-2012, 05:50 PM
Yeah it is. That article was written on the 16th of November.

Northeastmonk
01-25-2012, 06:06 PM
The internet rumor mill is cranking out "reliable sources" reporting on the next-generation of Xbox, a device that may or may not actually exist. Earlier today, we reported on rumors that the "Xbox 720" (a totally speculative name) will be out in Fall 2013. Since then, we've heard even more juicy rumors about the Xbox 360-2.

According to unnamed sources gathered by game blog Kotaku, the next-gen Xbox will support Blu-Ray discs as well as DVDs, will be up to eight times as powerful as the current Xbox 360, will feature smaller controllers, and will launch with a new version of the Kinect.

That's the good news. The bad news: The console will supposedly not allow gamers to play used games. At all.

Further details are sparse at this time. Should a no-used-games lock be put in place, we're not sure how it would work. And we don't, honestly, even know for sure that the device is being developed. But if I had to put money on the likelihood of these rumors being true, I'd say it's a pretty solid bet. There's nothing here that strikes me as totally unlikely, anyway.

While rumors of the device date back many months, the closest we've come to an official mention of the cojsole was from the screen capture you see below, cheeky product-placement from sci-fi movie Real Steel. It's not official or anything, but interesting anyway.

http://www.g4tv.com/thefeed/blog/post/720195/xbox-720-to-feature-blu-ray-support-but-reject-used-games-more-rumors-on-the-next-gen-xbox/

It came from there, plus I should stop speed reading, lol. It's really all hype until MS decides to do something.

Drunken Savior
01-25-2012, 07:40 PM
Welcome to the world of CD-Keys and exhaustive DRM, console-kiddies. You should have seen it coming.

Icarus4578
01-25-2012, 08:22 PM
Oh, that's just great. *sarcasm*

eastx
01-25-2012, 08:25 PM
Like others have said, if the no used games part of the rumor has any kernel of truth, it's just automatic online passes for games or something. They literally can't lock out used game sales or GameStop wouldn't carry the system.

Drunken Savior
01-25-2012, 08:30 PM
Then it looks like Gamestop will just have to die. It's not like people can only buy consoles there. And I don't think Microsoft really cares about Gamestop's well being.

Icarus4578
01-25-2012, 08:44 PM
That would impact our jobs sector that much worse. Because publishers are only guaranteed profits from the first-sale and don't get a cut of anything further, they're trying to circumvent the consumer's ability to resell their products. Not smart. Since they'd intend to lock each respective copy of software to one console, that would entail mandatory online connection -- another turn-off. What this will do is alienate a large portion of potential buyers -- myself included -- and embolden pirates to hack their console, thereby making the pirated console more appealing than the official.

This better just be a rumor.

eastx
01-25-2012, 08:44 PM
GameStop is a really important retailer. If they carried every system but one, guess which one would lag behind the others in sales? It's not unlike how the Dreamcast suffered when KayBee wouldn't carry it, but much worse since GameStop has far more sway in the games industry.

What this will do is alienate a large portion of potential buyers -- myself included -- and embolden pirates to hack their console, thereby making the pirated console more appealing than the official.

You already are alienated. You don't like most modern games, you hate the online focus that modern consoles have, you even hate that they offer multimedia features. Whether or not the next Xbox can play used games, you're unlikely to buy it and especially unlikely to be happy with it if you did buy it.

Drunken Savior
01-25-2012, 08:51 PM
GameStop is a really important retailer. If they carried every system but one, guess which one would lag behind the others in sales? It's not unlike how the Dreamcast suffered when KayBee wouldn't carry it, but much worse since GameStop has far more sway in the games industry.

I see your point, but that's operating under the assumption that Gamestop would actually protest by not selling the console. Their stockholder's won't share their passion for this protest when they see how many sales Gamestop lost out on over the holidays to the new XBox when Wallmart, Amazon, Target, etc are selling them like hotcakes.

I honestly don't think that people who buy consoles at Gamestop will 'give up' looking for it if Gamestop doesn't carry it. In the end, it'll make Gamestop look bad (e.g. "WHAT DO YOU MEAN YOU DON'T HAVE WHAT MY SON WANTED ON HIS XMAS LIST!?1!?") and lose out on sales. People will look elsewhere for the new XBox if Gamestop won't carry it.

Icarus4578
01-25-2012, 09:44 PM
You already are alienated. You don't like most modern games, you hate the online focus that modern consoles have, you even hate that they offer multimedia features. Whether or not the next Xbox can play used games, you're unlikely to buy it and especially unlikely to be happy with it if you did buy it.

That is true for the most part, yet I still own an X360 and Microsoft still made money at the end of the day, but they won't be making money from me in the future if this rumor holds true. And it isn't just me that feels this way -- don't try to distort the issue. This is going to do for console gaming what all that DRM did for PC gaming: alienate potential consumers and encourage piracy, not to mention hurt game retailers.

Icarus4578
01-25-2012, 09:56 PM
Oh, and just one other thing: no more rentals nor borrowing/lending of software.

Yeah, real smart move. See how well that one works out for them.

Kiuju2k
01-25-2012, 10:30 PM
Well you know what I will take that. This gen I just haven't been my usual graphics whore self, and I will take up the argument that I have been seeing lately with the some communities that this will help smaller companies who do not have the kind of budget to develop a AAA title and would have to sell out to EA or Activision in order to complete their game. Fuck that I don't want to see another 60 some odd game developers go under(Hudsonsoft lol wtf?) for this shit. I say fucking bring it, bring me a download service model like Steam and I'm good to go. Fuck it.

However this came from a very unreliable source in my opinion, and I doubt this is likely to be the case. As far as cutting out retailers, that sounds like a grand experiment I am curious to see how that turns out. I mean Best Buy is already a Amazon.com's showroom I wonder if M$ can do the same for gamestop, toys r us, walmart, best buy etc...

Northeastmonk
01-25-2012, 11:56 PM
Babbages went Bankrupt years back, EB Games then merged with Babbages (software etc.) and formed GameStop. Knowing that Barnes & Noble owns EB Games you'd think if one tanks the other would too. That merger also happened this generation, so go figure that a lot of changes to the industry can happen over a span of 3-4 years.

GameStop's executive vice president Michael Mauler recently told Edge Magazine that the sale of second hand video games benefits the entire industry - not just retailers. The benefit, he claims, is that these second-hand sales keep customers engaged with yearly franchises. Mauler said that without the opportunity to cash in on older titles, many gamers wouldn't be buying as many new ones.

http://gamepolitics.com/2011/08/23/developers-respond-gamestop039s-used-games-market-comments April 2011.

That's 3 or more $60 of your own money for 1 new title. They buy back and sell for 30%+ more. To be honest; It's a catch 22.

Kiuju2k
01-26-2012, 01:05 AM
Yeah it totally is, I mean if the big 3 can just come up with a reasonable online model ala Steam, then that would be legitimate and be a real threat to the brick and mortar stores. Actually no they wouldn't because they could actually coincide if they got their act together to be honest, it's the other publishers that are fucking shit up too.

spider-prime
01-26-2012, 06:24 AM
yah it's not a smart move if they do that, it could have a lot of backlash with people. I don't buy a lot of used games, but sometimes you need to find a game used to just get it. Unless there are always digital copies of it on XBL, there wouldn't be a way to play that unless it was mass produce, but not every game is like Call of Duty.
There are some RPGs I'm looking for that you can't buy anymore cause NIS seemed like they only released like 100 thousand of the game.

But this is MS, the console is probably going to be mostly digital downloading only. Perhaps this is the console they try it with the most.

Alucard
01-26-2012, 06:58 AM
If games ever go steam style for consoles I think their userbase will have a massive fit and cry. They love returning games, they love lining up at midnight, they love physical copies.

I'd like to touch up on the 6670 thing. If you think the system will suddenly be spitting out more power then the pc version of the card just because its more optimized you should think a little more. We're talking about something based off a $70 video card. It will be cheaper for them also since they wont be creating the chassis for the card, the ports, the large fan, and everything else. It'll just be all the microchips soldered to the board. So in effect it'll cost shitloads less then the $70 this card costs.

The most you can hope for are little tweaks to it and overclocked. The best you can hope for is a 10-15fps boost. Dont think just because the card on pc does 15fps in crysis 2 or whatever, it'll suddenly do 60fps. That sort of jump is not possible. Thats not how technology works. Not by a long shot.

When the 360 came out and microsoft said you'd need a billion dollar system to run what the console could won, it made all the parrots on the system go off and think this was true and spout the same rubbish. The system couldnt do plenty of things that the pc could do, which also freed up extra power. The thing didnt do proper shadows well, it didnt do AA, it didnt do proper lighting, it didnt go over 720p, it didnt use vsync, etc. You switch all those effects off on a pc game, you run them at lower textures, far far lower resolutions then pc gamers tend to play at, and you can run a game with the same graphic levels of a 360 system on a much lesser card for not a billion dollars. That system, despite all the tweaking and cheating, still cannot run the Source engine or Doom 3 engine how it should despite its supposed equal power to a $6000 system. My pc at that time could run any game with those at almost max detail, and my pc back then did not cost $6000. It wasnt even high end.

One other thing you need to realize is if you had a video card back when the 360 came out, it would still be able to run the exact same details as what the 360 is doing now. Its not suddenly 20 times more powerful. It still cant run Doom 3 with shadows nor can it run it with high anything higher then possibly medium textures. Shockingly enough it does the exact same as a video card in roughly the same power/price point it was designed around at that time. Developers just learn to cheat better and remove effects where they know they can and hope it isnt noticed. ie, the 1yard AF detail setting around characters in games, which limits the power exerted on the video card/ram/cpu. Everyone keeps forgetting the amount of corner cutting that console games do.

Now I'm not saying they're horribly ugly. Plenty of games look great. But thinking something like Uncharted 3 couldnt run on a video card I had 5+ years ago is bullshit. Hell, my card back then could run Oblivion smoothly with extra mod content including higher textures, more flora, better character models, more EVERYTHING then what skyrim in all its half arsed texture graphic level is serving us today, and 360 gamers think thats the coup de grace of graphical games.

In short, the video card will be a little more powerful then a 6670, the higher cpu and ram amounts will counter its power by adding more detail in textures and shadows, making people think the card is 10 times more godlier then it should be, but only because they're used to seeing fuck all texture/shadow/lighting on their current consoles, so it'll be a massive difference. But just for them. Anyone who thinks a 6670 powered card is fine, thats cool. You have no excuse not to upgrade your 50 year old pc then.

Until they throw out more information regarding everything else in it, right now it looks like this to me... 360 = low end pc. 720= mid range pc. Just for my own curiosity I'm looking forwad to pricing it to equal pc parts to see how much it would cost for a comparable pc when it comes out. I mean we still dont know if the system can even do dx10 effects yet. Logic says it should, but you dont know.

KingOfSentinels
01-26-2012, 07:58 AM
The most you can hope for are little tweaks to it and overclocked. The best you can hope for is a 10-15fps boost. Dont think just because the card on pc does 15fps in crysis 2 or whatever, it'll suddenly do 60fps. That sort of jump is not possible. Thats not how technology works. Not by a long shot.

That has been my point all along. :thumb-up:

The jump is never going to be massive, but it will go steadily up as years go by and developers get to grips with the hardware and games continue to optimise. But I was expecting a lot lot lot more. I was going to SLI my GTX 460 in time for this gen, but I probably don't even need to now.

spider-prime
01-26-2012, 08:20 AM
I think there was a article that said that both MS and sony were going to do what Nintendo did when they made the Wii which is just a suped up version of the gamecube.

Even if a company has a lot of money, they won't keep piling money on a race with a dead horse. They want to make money with the xbox, not lose it. They got what they wanted which was become a brand name for video games, now it's to make money right away.

Icarus4578
01-26-2012, 08:59 AM
Well you know what I will take that. This gen I just haven't been my usual graphics whore self, and I will take up the argument that I have been seeing lately with the some communities that this will help smaller companies who do not have the kind of budget to develop a AAA title and would have to sell out to EA or Activision in order to complete their game.

No, it wouldn't. If anything it will serve the bigger publisher's interests because it will make consumers more apprehensive about purchasing the middle-of-the-road software by smaller developers for the full list price, knowing that if the game doesn't live up to expectations, they cannot trade it in towards another one. This will result in more play-it-safe software and less risk-taking.

Locking down software to each respective owner's console is a bad business decision. Capcom were the recipients of consumer backlash when they announced that RE: The Mercenaries would only allow for one save file, so how do you think most people are going to respond if the rumor proves true that MS is locking down software to each individual console, eliminates game rentals and prevents consumers from selling back their software?

Why are you sympathizing with the corporate PR hyperbole? Not everybody has the disposable income to support both big and small developers. When it comes time for the average consumer to pick between that big budget game by that big publisher or the slightly more niche/experimental one by that smaller developer which scored slightly lower in the game media, the big developer is going to win everytime.

Can you say monopoly?

Alucard
01-26-2012, 09:14 AM
How cool would that feature have been if it was for the 360? Game locked to the system. Everytime the system dies you go buy a new one and boom, you have to pay for your game library again. Very smooth. And judging by how thick most console gamers are when it comes to marketing, I see it working really well for them. And I'm not being a bastard. Thats a truthful account of how their brains work. You convince them its awesome, they will then repeat it and love it. Much like the $6000 pc is comparable to the cheaper 360 so dont bother with pc gaming its just full of fps and rts games. Their fucking COD headsets which cost heaps are just cheap crap that cost half the price. They pay for the packaging.

Kiuju2k
01-26-2012, 01:21 PM
Can you say monopoly?

Monopoly

darren
01-26-2012, 02:04 PM
you failed you forgot to put it in italics

KingOfSentinels
01-26-2012, 02:16 PM
Why are you sympathizing with the corporate PR hyperbole? Not everybody has the disposable income to support both big and small developers. When it comes time for the average consumer to pick between that big budget game by that big publisher or the slightly more niche/experimental one by that smaller developer which scored slightly lower in the game media, the big developer is going to win everytime.

Not everytime, I know a lot of people who will buy Indie games over the big releases, myself included. I buy tonnes of Indie games because they're cheap and you can always find a quirky, innovative Indie game if you look around. And when they're on Steam sales, you can pick up like 20 of them for the same price as a new release, is ridiculous.

My latest love; Q.U.B.E. Love it. Only 12 for such an amazing game. Got it off Desura. :D Kicks the arse of some games which have the cheek to be up there for 40.

Icarus4578
01-26-2012, 07:55 PM
Do you believe that with the increase in dev costs that they'll be cheap? Companies need to recoup on their investments in order to sustain growth.

KingOfSentinels
01-26-2012, 08:21 PM
Development costs don't just go up for no reason. They go up if the developer decides to do more. It's the big budget titles which could get more expensive as graphics and scale increases, but not Indie, low-budget titles. They'll stay cheap.

Kiuju2k
01-26-2012, 10:17 PM
Well you know what about R&D? I mean nobody wants to make a shitty game and honestly next gen is more than just graphics fidelity. That's at least the impression I got when I played games this gen like ME and DS. I wasn't really floored when I played either game visually, but they were fun as hell and told decent stories for me to stick around.

I see you arguement though, but maybe I just don't feel like pay five hundred and ninety nine dollars for my next console.

Icarus4578
01-27-2012, 11:19 AM
Although this is PC-related, I thought I'd share this as a preview of what you can expect more of come the next gen consoles: http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120122/08260517502/tales-ubisoft-drm-latest-drm-goes-horrible-to-slightly-less-horrible.shtm

Basically Ubisoft's DRM protection for Anon 2070 is limited to three activations, any of which could be used up by something as simple as changing your graphics card, and once all three activations have been used up you're no longer allowed to play, unless of course you re-purchase the game. That was Ubisoft's initial smart-alec response to Guru3d who were doing benchmark testing with their software. Then after the story went viral, Ubisoft went into damage control mode and rectified the problem, at least as far as changing graphics cards is concered. The whole situation is absurd. As one commenter opined: Since when did we give up our right to own the products we purchase?

Expect a lot more crazy DRM protection schematics like this to occur with greater frequency come next gen. You'll need to authenticate your purchased software online in order to play it and should anything happen to your account, that's it -- your software will be good for nothing, just a cheap piece of plastic. I can't believe that anyone would defend such draconian corporatism.

darren
01-27-2012, 11:24 AM
You'll need to authenticate your purchased software online in order to play it and should anything happen to your account, that's it -- your software will be good for nothing, just a cheap piece of plastic. I can't believe that anyone would defend such draconian corporatism

and your proof for this is????

not a chance will they insist that console games are registered online .. kids with systems in their bedrooms with no web access??? not a chance it will happen for single player games .. NOW .. all online game will require passes that can only be used once, then like this gen a 10 few to take a 2nd hand copy on line, which tbh i have no issues with

Icarus4578
01-27-2012, 11:28 AM
The rumor stated that you'd need to be online in order to authenticate (activate) your software, which means that if you don't have an online connection, you're not playing.

Alucard
01-27-2012, 11:38 AM
Plenty of games have this, and not just ubisoft. Bloody sega is doing it too and so are a few others. Its also not limited to online games. Its for single player games too. And they want people to stop pirating? This shit just makes more people pirate then it normally would. I wonder how long till movie companies start doing this with movies. Buy a bluray, log onto the net with your bluray player to activate access to watching it through your account. After a few views you have to pay to re-activate it again. Its so coming.

darren
01-27-2012, 11:47 AM
The rumor stated that you'd need to be online in order to authenticate (activate) your software, which means that if you don't have an online connection, you're not playing.

which mean there will drop user base .. personally i dont believe everything i read in the press thank god

its 100% coming for online content on consoles that much is a given, single player stuff aimed at kiddies?? more chance of leapfrog doing it tbh

Icarus4578
01-27-2012, 11:49 AM
Yup, it is, and there's no way to get around it except by voting 'no' with your money.

darren
01-27-2012, 11:51 AM
well no coz i dont give a shit tbh .. i never buy used games .. i HATE THEM, so i couldnt care less if some pikey that cant afford the retail or wait for a sale cant play it. .. i never buy used, games, books, dvds, blue rays etc .. never ..

the people who should be worried are the people that work at the likes of gamestop who make there money on rip off 2nd hand prices. but again .. i use online so couldnt give a toss what happens to them tbh

KingOfSentinels
01-27-2012, 11:52 AM
Same here. Not a fan of buying used at all. Never sell games either.

Icarus4578
01-27-2012, 11:54 AM
And you guys also never lend/borrow software.

darren
01-27-2012, 11:54 AM
nope, my mates buy there own stuff, plus i play 90% of my games on PC, unless i take my hdd round to Murrays house he's not borrowing anything.

the only people i see crying about this will be people that

a/ cant afford the retail price
b/ cant wait to get stuff 6 months after release cheaper in sales etc ..

so i couldn't give a crap about them .. if you cant afford it get a new fucking hobby tbh .. i'd love to go snowboarding in the Alps every weekend but i cant afford it .. i don't moan i just get one with doing something else in the time i cant go boarding.

/edit/

i forgot

c/ the people that buy a game day 1 .. run home beat it in one sitting run back the game and either get a full refund or trade it in, then run back beat it , run back to trade in .. rince and repeat ....

i couldnt give a toss about them either

KingOfSentinels
01-27-2012, 11:55 AM
Nope, me neither.

Alucard
01-27-2012, 12:09 PM
You arent noticing all the other stuff that come with the DRM. Its not just returning/lending/second hand etc. Theres more ways to screw you. Like your console dies and you replace it. Boom, you pay for your games again.

darren
01-27-2012, 12:13 PM
well .. that happened with my 360 .. and BOOM .. i just re downloaded all the stuff i had paid for .. same goes for my PS3, same goes for my PC my HDD goes pop .. BOOM i can reinstall my origin and steam games isnt the internet amazing .. so it kinda depends on how they do it doesnt it really

SOO .. untill they actual say what they are going to do if anything .. i'll wait and pass judgement then assuming they are going down the drm route ..

Kiuju2k
01-27-2012, 02:54 PM
No way in hell they are going to do that, you can' t possibly believe that next gen games will require online passes to play. Believe it or not there are still people out there that don't have access to the internet and their only access is via phone or library. Why alienate them? However I do believe gamestop is in trouble next go round I am sure they are planning some fuck over tactic.

For me used games can be games that you can no longer fine or last gen. I have plenty of used this gen that were this gen and were dirt cheap. I bought dragon age used, but I had to buy each of the individual content so I still basically paid full retail. However I bought ME used on live for 20 bucks and that is like the best investment I ever fucking made online. Just follow steam man, their sales are way better and the publisher/dev get the money.

Alucard
01-27-2012, 04:29 PM
Actually theres already a few publishers who slap certain DRM on their games that require you to be online to activate it once. If you have no way of getting online they pretty much shrug and dont care. Sega being one of them. They just dont give a shit.

darren
01-27-2012, 04:34 PM
you talking pc or console? as sega dont do it where they sell most off there stuff

Reality
01-27-2012, 04:54 PM
which mean there will drop user base .. personally i dont believe everything i read in the press thank god

its 100% coming for online content on consoles that much is a given, single player stuff aimed at kiddies?? more chance of leapfrog doing it tbh

Well they are testing it now with current games. EA more than anyone else. http://www.joystiq.com/2012/01/27/kingdoms-of-amalur-reckoning-locks-out-questline-via-online-pas/

darren
01-27-2012, 04:56 PM
Well you can still play it with out registering online

That doesn't seem any different to loads of games that give you some extra stuff if you register. Still all work second hand

Alucard
01-27-2012, 05:06 PM
you talking pc or console? as sega dont do it where they sell most off there stuff

Pretty sure one of the games was football manager, and that game sells millions.

darren
01-27-2012, 05:08 PM
I said most .. Carry in kidding yourself if you think sega don't sell most of there stuff on console ..

Oh they sell about 900k a title not millions .

Reality
01-27-2012, 05:36 PM
Well you can still play it with out registering online

That doesn't seem any different to loads of games that give you some extra stuff if you register. Still all work second hand

How so? I mean, the original game yes, but not the "special" included content. It requires you register your online code. Its kinda shady. Hints at other possibilities. Like if Multi-Player modes require online registrations. To eliminate 2nd hand sales.

Which, in truth is already a practice. This is a list of games that require a online pass of some kind to have access to the content of the disk.

Battlefield 3, 2
Bulletstorm
Dead Space 2
DiRT3
Dragon Age 2
Driver: San Francisco
EA Sports MMA
F1 2011
FEAR 3
Fifa 11, 12
Fight Night Champion
Homefront
Madden NFL 11, 12
Mortal Kombat
NCAA Football 11, 12
Need for Speed Hot Pursuit
Need For Speed Shift 2
NHL 11, 12
Ratchet & Clank: All 4 One
Resistance 3
Skate 3
Socom Fireteam Bravo 3
Socom 4
Tiger Woods PGA Tour 11, 12
UFC 2010 Undisputed
Uncharted 3
WWE Smackdown vs. Raw 2011

So in a way, the rumor about games being registered online in order to work on your system could be the eventual direction of the industry. As its the publishers who are pushing it the hardest.

darren
01-27-2012, 05:41 PM
Shady or a clever way to get suckers to pay an xtra 5-10 for a special ed with an xtra hat. The latter tbh. And those twats deserve be taken for a ride tbh.

Thats a nice list i have a fair chunk of them so i know they have online passes. I spent seconds typing them in, and enjoying it online content if I wanted it. Half the time I didn't bother and sold the games second hand with an unused code.

Tbh If you buy the game new not sure why anyone would care if they have to put a code in. I do it every time with my pc.

Locking out some content is different than locking out the entire game which they will not do next gen .. Not saying its not the direction they want to go ..but not next gen .. Networks are simply not there globally for it to work. As I keep saying though .. They will 100% online pass online content for every game next gen that's for sure, it's an easy way to get 10 for anyone buying 2nd hand games that want to take it online and tbh I don't blame them

What content is locked out of FIFA 11 .. There's no codes or anything on my kids version and they play all the content single player and online.

Alucard
01-27-2012, 05:48 PM
I said most .. Carry in kidding yourself if you think sega don't sell most of there stuff on console ..

Oh they sell about 900k a title not millions .

FM games always sell over a million after a few months. The game was never a sega title to begin with until recently. And probably 99% of those sales are pc. And yes most of their games sell more on console but thats because majority of their games are console games.

KingOfSentinels
01-27-2012, 07:06 PM
Yup, I see no problem with this at all, and I actually give it the thumbs up and hope it carries on. An online pass for multiplayer components on the game is perfectly valid, doesn't take much to just key in a code. And the pass to access more stuff for single-player, I think that's great too. It's a nice deterrent to buying used games, and in the process, it's not particularly Nazi-ish or ruins the entire game experience like some DRM does. As long as it never effects the main storyline of the game, then yeah, I hope this hops into quite a few more games.

Kiuju2k
01-27-2012, 07:19 PM
For ME1 that I got on games on demand did not have any DRM codes or anything like that at all. It cost me 20 dollars. That's what I actually meant.

Reality
01-27-2012, 07:22 PM
Aren't online passes restricted to one gamertag per use? That would suck for multiple gamer tag consoles.

Kiuju2k
01-27-2012, 07:25 PM
I think your right because I have two gamertags that I use on live. Either way all that was required of me was to pay, download, then play. It really shouldn't go any further than that.

I understand that there are restrictions but there is no hassle of entering any bullshit in. However, for BF3 on my ps3 I had to do some stupid shit when i bought the game brand new. That should be avoided.

progmetal
01-27-2012, 07:38 PM
Yeah these online passes sucks. My son activated the online pass first, so i had to "share" his code. Luckily Sony still has the 2 share limit, but it sure sucks to have these passes. Some of EA's codes also have a time limit, so if you buy a game new from the shop after it's been out for 6 months the codes have expired.

Escaflowne2001
01-28-2012, 12:23 AM
Kingdom Of Amular has a code that unlocks 7 missions from the single player without it that part of the story remains locked/hidden.

Investor27
01-28-2012, 02:00 AM
Now that is just stupid, unfair and extrememly consumer non-friendly.

Kingdom Of Amular has a code that unlocks 7 missions from the single player without it that part of the story remains locked/hidden.

Alucard
01-28-2012, 04:07 AM
PCs started out with CDkeys too. They evolved. As you can see from the Amular example above, it'll keep evolving for console too. You're happy now but you wont be later.

darren
01-28-2012, 05:05 AM
well tbh f you buy it new you wouldnt give a shit .. 2nd hand shoppers will cry cry tho

/goes to get the worlds smallest violin for them to play/

KingOfSentinels
01-28-2012, 05:44 AM
Exactly. If you can't buy it new, wait till it's cheaper or in a sale, and buy it then. Simple solution to all of life's problems, and you'll be supporting the dev while doing so. Win win.

Honestly, I only buy the most epic games now new, because give it a year or so and they'll be 50%+ off during a Steam holiday sale. No point splashing out 40 on an average title nowadays, it'll be cheap soon enough without resorting to buying used.

progmetal
01-28-2012, 06:51 AM
It doesn't help if you buy it new but the code have expired.

KingOfSentinels
01-28-2012, 06:56 AM
It doesn't say anywhere codes will expire, or that I've seen. And why would they? My CD keys from years and years ago all still work perfectly fine.

Escaflowne2001
01-28-2012, 07:01 AM
It doesn't say anywhere codes will expire, or that I've seen. And why would they? My CD keys from years and years ago all still work perfectly fine.

Most of the unlock passes have expire dates on them for example looking at my copy of Dragon Age 2 the code expires on the 31st March 2012.

progmetal
01-28-2012, 07:07 AM
There were some problems with EA's codes in Dragon Age were it said it expired the 12th of March and some other titles, but EA has recently said that the codes should work and they provide you new ones if they don't.

And you still have to buy online passes if you go past the 2 shares on PS3. On the Xbox it's probably limited to only one user. :too mad:

KingOfSentinels
01-28-2012, 07:17 AM
I didn't know they had expiry codes on them, that's a bit retarded. I managed to activate my old Neverwinter Nights game not so long ago and that was released in 2002, I expected it'd be the same here tbh.

As long as EA honour handing out new codes if your ones have expired, then I'm sure it's fine.

spider-prime
01-28-2012, 07:29 AM
There were some problems with EA's codes in Dragon Age were it said it expired the 12th of March and some other titles, but EA has recently said that the codes should work and they provide you new ones if they don't.

And you still have to buy online passes if you go past the 2 shares on PS3. On the Xbox it's probably limited to only one user. :too mad:


on the PS3, that's for only 2 systems, but other profiles and PSN accounts on the same system can use it without hassle. But games before the new EULA still use 5 consoles. I found this out with my new slim that I got. But movies were limited to 2 no matter what.

Alucard
01-28-2012, 07:49 AM
Actually a bunch of stuff on my ps3 had expiry dates. Usually it was on cards that you got when you preordered the game or some special thing. My copy of Modnation Racers for example, I didnt use it for the first month after I got it since I was too busy, and by the time I got it the preorder special items codes didnt work.

spider-prime
01-28-2012, 07:54 AM
Free DLC that comes with the games do have expiry dates, my DLC that came with Yakuza 3 expired also when I got it. But online passes aren't supposed to. You just have to bitch to them if it doesn't work.

Icarus4578
01-28-2012, 08:20 AM
I prefer the times when you'd put the game into the console and start playing. Nothing could be more simple. If I acquire a game, regardless how, I better be allowed to play it whenever and wherever I want. So now the things we acquire don't actually belong to us and we need to phone home to some multi-billion dollar corporation in order to get their permission to play? Not a chance.

KingOfSentinels
01-28-2012, 08:37 AM
Well that's a bit of an exaggeration, you can still play the game. And if you're going online, you can take a few seconds to put in your code, it's really not that bad.

Used game sales have hurt developers for as long as Gaming has been around really. None of that money goes back to them after all. It's not as bad as piracy, but it's still a problem. We just finally have the technology to really try and prevent it now, that's why it's only popped up in recent times. There was no chance of a system like this on the PS2 and original Xbox.

I think they still need to iron out some of the problems, clearly, but I'm glad the industry is taking a step in the right direction on this.

Alucard
01-28-2012, 08:47 AM
You can thank Bethesda and xbox gamers for that. Fucking horse armour started it all. HORSE ARMOUR! WTF! Bunch of brain dead fucking retards.

Icarus4578
01-28-2012, 08:51 AM
Well that's a bit of an exaggeration, you can still play the game. And if you're going online, you can take a few seconds to put in your code, it's really not that bad.

If the rumor is true, each game would require mandatory registration online in order to play. Yeah, it really would be that bad. The consumer shouldn't need to prove ownership.

Used game sales have hurt developers for as long as Gaming has been around really. None of that money goes back to them after all.

And yet that's the way the free market has worked for decades. This ploy for public sympathy, "Ooh, we're all suffering because we cannot profit from anything beyond the first-sale," is so very touching. In reality, they're just greedy and want to profit from the second-hand market. Too bad for them.

We just finally have the technology to really try and prevent it now, that's why it's only popped up in recent times. There was no chance of a system like this on the PS2 and original Xbox.

Prevent what, the citizens from having the opportunity to participate in the free market and make money off used goods? But since the corporates are so endlessly greedy and cannot bend the market to benefit themselves at every juncture, they'll simply try to circumvent it with their one-game-per-console scheme.

I think they still need to iron out some of the problems, clearly, but I'm glad the industry is taking a step in the right direction on this.

This is a step towards corporate fascism. You must work for one, otherwise it makes absolutely no sense to sympathize with their transparent attempt to strangulate the market to suit their greedy ambitions.

spider-prime
01-28-2012, 09:00 AM
it won't work for most games like dead space 2. You wanna know why? Cause nobody buys these kind of games for their multiplayer!

People will still buy them used. Same with Batman AA, the catwoman stuff was boring, people will still just buy it used.

The only games it will work for are huge games like Call of Duty where people are buying them for multiplayer. But then people buy that brand new anyways. It's a stupid system that will only make them a little bit extra from used games. People are buying used games to save money, they won't buy the DLC/pass if they don't need it.

If they want people buying games new more than used, they need to lower the prices by 10 dollars.... but then used games will be 15 dollars cheaper! OH NOES THE DILEMMA!

The only way to make money off of people using this kind of idea is that you need it to play the entire game for every game on the console. But if it's that way. I can see people going to the other system that doesn't do that.

Do not trick the people with trickery to buy brand new, do it with incentives.

Icarus4578
01-28-2012, 09:13 AM
It's not really trickery per se, it's just plain greed. If such a system were in place, in order for you to even start playing would require mandatory online registration, which would have a negative effect on consumer choice, game retailers and just the industry in general. Imagine if they tried that with physical movie/music discs. Piracy would escalate to an unprecedented level. You're absolutely right in that they should lower the cost of games but that's not going to happen.

darren
01-28-2012, 09:14 AM
If the rumor is true, each game would require mandatory registration online in order to play. Yeah, it really would be that bad. The consumer shouldn't need to prove ownership.


really?? why is it that bad .. its been happening for decades with pc games where is your stand against that??? its no big deal if you buy the game new

buy game, open game,t ype in code, play game .. fuck me that really was bad/difficult

if you live off 2nd hand .. then tbh tough shit get a hobby you can afford IMO, or learn that you will either have to start paying to unlock stuff.

. In reality, they're just greedy and want to profit from the second-hand market. Too bad for them.

well no .. its too bad for people who cant wait for a price on stuff they are told they need day 1. i see a great benefit to no second hand market .. it means when i go to buy a game from the high street store i will noty have to queue behind some smell pikey with a ruck sac full of old shit games .. moaning that he is only getting 1 trade in on each one if he's lucky ...


This is a step towards corporate fascism. You must work for one, otherwise it makes absolutely no sense to sympathize with their transparent attempt to strangulate the market to suit their greedy ambitions.

why when some has a different opinion to you do you attack who/where they work as making our they are working for some evil empire? either you don't have a job, have a shit job, or are just pain thick to keep suggest such nonsense

he actually works for a small dev company where the sale of new games against that of the second hand market could mean the difference between them staying open or not .. i wonder why he wants the second hand market gone???? hmmmm let me think????


they should lower the cost of games but that's not going to happen.

they did this gen .. i pay a lot less for new games this gen than i did last gen

infact its been coming down gen after gen after gen thanks to the evil internet. SNES/Megadrive gen was way more costly for a new game than it is now

KingOfSentinels
01-28-2012, 09:32 AM
This is a step towards corporate fascism. You must work for one, otherwise it makes absolutely no sense to sympathize with their transparent attempt to strangulate the market to suit their greedy ambitions.

No, I don't sympathise for cheapskates who buy used and don't support the developers. A lot of money gets lost on used games sales, and I for one like to support the developers whose games I enjoy. The only used game sales I sympathise are older games, since you can't get them new. But people who buy used games in the first week or so of their release, I honestly don't give a shit if they can't do that anymore. Boohoo.

Cry all you like about a free market but this isn't stopping used game sales. You can still buy them used if you really want to. But now you'll spend an extra 10 or so if you want the pass to unlock new stuff and/or the multiplayer component. It's a nice deterrent and is a way that developers can still earn money from used sales. And PC has survived all this time needing online authentication, console players can too.

Also, funnily enough, not every business looking to earn money is greedy and evil. Thought I'd point that out.

Icarus4578
01-28-2012, 09:45 AM
really?? why is it that bad .. its been happening for decades with pc games where is your stand against that??? its no big deal if you buy the game new

buy game, open game,t ype in code, play game .. fuck me that really was bad/difficult

Except that this doesn't always work and the system is ripe for abuse. I've read many times about how some gamer tried to register their game but couldn't, about how some games would force an online connection in order to play. BTW, the PC second-hand market is not comparable to the console one. Far more people buy/sell used software for consoles.

if you live off 2nd hand .. then tbh tough shit get a hobby you can afford IMO, or learn that you will either have to start paying to unlock stuff.

That's a real arrogant position to take, especially when you consider the economic climate we're in. Not everybody can afford to purchase everything new out of the gate. A lot of gamers take a wait-and-see approach because they have to be smart with their disposable income.

well no .. its too bad for people who cant wait for a price on stuff they are told they need day 1. i see a great benefit to no second hand market .. it means when i go to buy a game from the high street store i will noty have to queue behind some smell pikey with a ruck sac full of old shit games .. moaning that he is only getting 1 trade in on each one if he's lucky ...

This is just a nonsensical straw man argument. Your 'example' doesn't take into consideration reality, such as that the vast majority of used game sales are not happening on a street corner somewhere but rather major retailers like GameStop or online auction sites like eBay and Craigslist.

why when some has a different opinion to you do you attack who/where they work as making our they are working for some evil empire? either you don't have a job, have a shit job, or are just pain thick to keep suggest such nonsense

You can play 'shoot the messenger' all you want in an effort to divert attention away from the subject matter. It's unsympathetic towards consumers who ought to have a choice to do what they want with the products they've purchased. This effectively strips them of their choice to sell back used goods. Once again, not everybody can afford to throw around money like it grows on trees. MS will effectively create a market of exclusion.

he actually works for a small dev company where the sale of new games against that of the second hand market could mean the difference between them staying open or not .. i wonder why he wants the second hand market gone???? hmmmm let me think????

You play the violin well, but I'm not tearing up. So basically you're apologizing for his company because they may not have what it takes to offer competitive products in the marketplace. News flash: He still doesn't get to choose how the free market operates.


they did this gen .. i pay a lot less for new games this gen than i did last gen

You could've fooled me. New software ranges from $59-69 -- approximately the same as last gen.

infact its been coming down gen after gen after gen thanks to the evil internet. SNES/Megadrive gen was way more costly for a new game than it is now

Dude, whatever. Manfacturing a plastic disc in a case costs less than a nickel yet they still price-gouge. This reminds me of how the music industry promised that as time went by and production costs dwindled, CD prices would also fall. Didn't happen. As a matter of fact, they jacked up the prices.

Icarus4578
01-28-2012, 09:49 AM
No, I don't sympathise for cheapskates who buy used and don't support the developers. A lot of money gets lost on used games sales, and I for one like to support the developers whose games I enjoy. The only used game sales I sympathise are older games, since you can't get them new. But people who buy used games in the first week or so of their release, I honestly don't give a shit if they can't do that anymore. Boohoo.

Good. Why don't you tell everybody which company you work for and plaster this same post on every major gaming forum and let the people decide what they think. :)

Cry all you like about a free market but this isn't stopping used game sales. You can still buy them used if you really want to. But now you'll spend an extra 10 or so if you want the pass to unlock new stuff and/or the multiplayer component. It's a nice deterrent and is a way that developers can still earn money from used sales. And PC has survived all this time needing online authentication, console players can too.

Your basing your argument on faulty logic. Read the rumor again: Each individual game would be locked to one platform and require mandatory online activation, thereby rendering the second-hand market useless.

Also, funnily enough, not every business looking to earn money is greedy and evil. Thought I'd point that out.

No, just those which try to rub out an entire portion of the marketplace out of sheer greed.

Alucard
01-28-2012, 09:54 AM
Used games can be helpful not just saving money, but for games that arent sold anymore. How many of you have been buying old games for previous consoles, or games that arent manufactured anymore because spaz company only made 20? I've got a few of those. Not every game stays on the shelf forever. I remember a couple times waiting for my dodgy EB store to get a game I wanted in but they had a used copy so I saved myself 3 weeks waiting.

Also like Icarus said, used game industry is totally different on console then it is on pc. Heaps of people buy shit day 1 because they know they can return it in a week. All those greedy corporations are going to suddenly notice a drop in game sales from these people. And these plenty of them. Proof being the massive used game section at stores.

Like it was said, shit starts with CD keys. Thats fine. But it evolves into stupid shit later. Thats the point thats being made. You're happy to take it now but you wont be later. Stepping stone has been placed. Enjoy the rapage that follows later.

KingOfSentinels
01-28-2012, 09:54 AM
You say I'm basing my argument on faulty logic, while you're arguing about a fucking rumour which most of us have said is probably bolicks.

http://www.glaven.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/derp.jpg

Icarus4578
01-28-2012, 09:59 AM
And you'd know that it's false how? This sounds exactly like what many companies have been trying to implement for a long while now. What? Their game didn't meet projected sales figures? What's their solution, to make higher-quality, competitive products? Nope. To take it out on the gamers via draconian market regulatory capture.

darren
01-28-2012, 10:07 AM
That's a real arrogant position to take, especially when you consider the economic climate we're in. Not everybody can afford to purchase everything new out of the gate. A lot of gamers take a wait-and-see approach because they have to be smart with their disposable income.

its not arrogant in the slightest .. sadly fuck wits are lead to believe they MUST rush out and buy it day 1 .. if they wait 6-12 month or even a few weeks they will get it for less than 1/2 price .

and if people cant afford a new video game all the time its not my problem, id suggest they have bigger things to worry about than video games ..

i work fucking hard for what i have and guess what there's loads of stuff id love to do but cant afford it .. and guess what i don't moan about it either i get on with what i can afford to do.

as i said wait till the price drops and buy it new. chirst i got a new Batman AC less than 1/2 price 3 weeks after it came out .. LESS than the 2nd hand price ..


This is just a nonsensical straw man argument. Your 'example' doesn't take into consideration reality, such as that the vast majority of used game sales are not happening on a street corner somewhere but rather major retailers like GameStop or online auction sites like eBay and Craigslist.


Gamestop is the same as Game in the UK where i have to queue up behind pikeys with sacks of shit .. i was talking about retail stores .. i could'nt careless if average random cant sell his shit on ebay or craigslist any more ..



You can play 'shoot the messenger' all you want in an effort to divert attention away from the subect matter.

i call it fact.


You could've fooled me. New software ranges from $59-69 -- approximately the same as last gen.

if you pay $60-70 for a new game then your a bigger cock than i took you for tbh


Dude, whatever. Manfacturing a plastic disc in a case costs less than a nickel yet they still price-gouge. This reminds me of how the music industry promised that as time went by and production costs dwindled, CD prices would also fall. Didn't happen. As a matter of fact, they jacked up the prices.


I used to work in a high street indie game shop during the snes/gen times .. they were more costly than the game are now in the UK .. FACT .. new games in the UK cost me less this gen than they did last gen .. FACT

Icarus4578
01-28-2012, 10:21 AM
its not arrogant in the slightest .. sadly fuck wits are lead to believe they MUST rush out and buy it day 1 .. if they wait 6-12 month or even a few weeks they will get it for less than 1/2 price .

Nonsense! I have a GameStop near where I live and they lower the price of the newer used software by about a mere $10. Also, many new titles don't drop in price until about 6-12 months.

and if people cant afford a new video game all the time its not my problem, id suggest they have bigger things to worry about than video games ..

Once again, you're being blind to the hardships many people are going through. I've come to expect that from you. Bad mentality.

i work fucking hard for what i have and guess what there's loads of stuff id love to do but cant afford it .. and guess what i don't moan about it either i get on with what i can afford to do.

So in other words, on the basis that you personally purchase new stuff, you expect everybody else to follow suit. How do you know what hardships other people go through? There are people who are working two or even three jobs just to make ends meet. Maybe they want to relax at some point with a video game, and maybe they have to be frugal and purchase used software, but because you live a certain way, they should have the choice of purchasing used software stripped from them.

as i said wait till the price drops and buy it new. chirst i got a new Batman AC less than 1/2 price 3 weeks after it came out .. LESS than the 2nd hand price ..

So what? That's a rare exception that doesn't take into account how the rest of the market operates.

Gamestop is the same as Game in the UK where i have to queue up behind pikeys with sacks of shit .. i was talking about retail stores .. i could'nt careless if average random cant sell his shit on ebay or craigslist any more ..

Once again, you couldn't but maybe somebody else does. Heck, there's a huge market for the older stuff people want.


i call it fact.

if you pay $60-70 for a new game then your a bigger cock than i took you for tbh

Oh, really? Question: How much does a new game retail for on average? Answer: $60-70.

I used to work in a high street indie game shop during the snes/gen times .. they were more costly than the game are now in the UK .. FACT .. new games in the UK cost me less this gen than they did last gen .. FACT

Thanks for drudging up the gaming market from two decades ago. We're talking about the present situation.

KingOfSentinels
01-28-2012, 10:27 AM
Once again, you're being blind to the hardships many people are going through. I've come to expect that from you. Bad mentality.

If you're going through hardships, stop buying fucking games and sort your life out. Simple solution.

Icarus4578
01-28-2012, 10:30 AM
If you're going through hardships, stop buying fucking games and sort your life out. Simple solution.

I'm not going through hardships but other people are. And even if they're not, stripping consumers of the option to trade back in or sell used goods is just plain stupid.

darren
01-28-2012, 10:41 AM
Nonsense! I have a GameStop near where I live and they lower the price of the newer used software by about a mere $10. Also, many new titles don't drop in price until about 6-12 months.

hmm i live i england i couldnt care less about your local gamestop in the US tbh

.. do you know how much they drop the prices here?? NO .. like i said i paid 20 for Batman AC 3 week after it came out .. Mass Effect 2 was 20 about 4 weeks after it came out .. big games always hit the bargain bins here as shops over order and want to get rid ready for the next stuff ..



Once again, you're being blind to the hardships many people are going through. I've come to expect that from you. Bad mentality.

its a not a bad mentality in the slightest .. i could not give a shit if you or anyone else cannot afford a video game

the 1st and for most thing for me to do is care for my family and thats what i do, last last thing i will ever give a shit about is if someone can afford a video game or not .. infact i will NEVER give a shit if someone can afford to buy a video game or not .. i would care if someone i new couldnt afford food .. but a videogame? NEVER .. and why should I..



There are people who are working two or even three jobs just to make ends meet.

and i would say to them stop wasting money on video games and do something that doesn't cost as much to do or is free, save your money its better in the long run ..


So what? That's a rare exception that doesn't take into account how the rest of the market operates.

its not rare here at all ..



Oh, really? Question: How much does a new game retail for on average? Answer: $60-70.

uk high street 40rrp .. BUT if you shop around you can get day 1 game for 25-30 ..

so as i said if you pay full RRP for a game day 1 your a cock.



Thanks for drudging up the gaming market from two decades ago. We're talking about the present situation.

thats rich coming from you, pot and the kettle etc .. simple fact is its cheaper NOW than then .

Icarus4578
01-28-2012, 11:07 AM
hmm i live i england i couldnt care less about your local gamestop in the US tbh

.. do you know how much they drop the prices here?? NO .. like i said i paid 20 for Batman AC 3 week after it came out .. Mass Effect 2 was 20 about 4 weeks after it came out .. big games always hit the bargain bins here as shops over order and want to get rid ready for the next stuff ..

Interesting. I just went on both Gamespot.co.uk and Gamespot.com and compared the prices for Batman ~ Arkham City. In the UK it is 29.97 and in the US it's $59.99 ($54.99 used). The current exchange rate is 1 US dollar = 0.6360 British pounds sterling (1 US dollar = 0.7572 euros). IOW, they're about the same across the board.

its a not a bad mentality in the slightest .. i could not give a shit if you or anyone else cannot afford a video game

And you're in a position to tell others that they shouldn't be allowed to purchase second-hand goods?

the 1st and for most thing for me to do is care for my family and thats what i do, last last thing i will ever give a shit about is if someone can afford a video game or not .. infact i will NEVER give a shit if someone can afford to buy a video game or not .. i would care if someone i new couldnt afford food .. but a videogame? NEVER .. and why should I..

It ought to matter if the VG market is going to survive and flourish. Eliminating the second-hand market will have negative effects on this industry and only serve the bigger corporations' interests.

and i would say to them stop wasting money on video games and do something that doesn't cost as much to do or is free, save your money its better in the long run ..

This financial advice after talking down on people.

its not rare here at all ..

So you say. I don't see much of a difference between markets.

uk high street 40rrp .. BUT if you shop around you can get day 1 game for 25-30 ..

Yeah, like what, Yogi Bear's Magic Casino or something? (I just made that up.) 40 translates to around $70.

so as i said if you pay full RRP for a game day 1 your a cock.

:clap:


thats rich coming from you, pot and the kettle etc .. simple fact is its cheaper NOW than then .

Yeah and therefore shouldn't cost as much to purchase, yet they do.

KingOfSentinels
01-28-2012, 11:10 AM
It ought to matter if the VG market is going to survive and fourish. Eliminating the second-hand market will have adverse effects for this industry and only serve the bigger corporates' interests.

LOL.

Used game sales hurt the industry. Eliminating second-hand sales would benefit the industry. It'd hurt stores like Game, and people might not be happy about it, though I don't give a shit if they aren't, but the videogame industry itself would benefit quite a bit from it all; people who would have bought used would either buy new, or wait till it's cheaper and buy new. Either way, it's a win for the developer, since they actually get money out of it now.

A business wanting to make a profit is not an evil corporation, otherwise every company in the world is an evil corporation. And since used game make them lose money, every developer has every right to want to try and stop it. And this is quite a simple, easy solution. The online pass is a great idea.

Escaflowne2001
01-28-2012, 11:15 AM
How many people buy new games with the money they get through selling old games though? I know quite a few people that do myself included. Doing away with the second-hand market would totally kill that.

Icarus4578
01-28-2012, 11:16 AM
You're making up presumptuous nonsense based on how you perceive the market will react. If the second-hand market for MS's next console is defunct, this can only have a negative impact on the industry. Many people will simply abstain from purchasing their console, myself included, and those that do will purchase less software because A) they'll be forced to purchase new software, and B) they cannot trade in used software for credit towards something else.

Esca, exactly. My bro does it all the time.

Icarus4578
01-28-2012, 11:20 AM
LOL.

Used game sales hurt the industry. Eliminating second-hand sales would benefit the industry. It'd hurt stores like Game, and people might not be happy about it, though I don't give a shit if they aren't, but the videogame industry itself would benefit quite a bit from it all; people who would have bought used would either buy new, or wait till it's cheaper and buy new. Either way, it's a win for the developer, since they actually get money out of it now.

A business wanting to make a profit is not an evil corporation, otherwise every company in the world is an evil corporation. And since used game make them lose money, every developer has every right to want to try and stop it. And this is quite a simple, easy solution. The online pass is a great idea.

Why must you constantly post a message only to add a paragraph to it afterward?

Your problem is that you're trying to rub out the second-hand market in its entirety simply because you're looking at how this can benefit you. Used games don't make them lose any more money than used movies and music make those industries lose money -- it's a fallacious argument with zero credible evidence to substantiate it.

KingOfSentinels
01-28-2012, 11:23 AM
How many people buy new games with the money they get through selling old games though? I know quite a few people that do myself included. Doing away with the second-hand market would totally kill that.

That's not the problem. The problem is the people who will buy that game you sold, and that's why a simple online pass is the solution to it all. People can buy used games for a bit cheaper, and still support the developers.

I don't know why Icarus thinks the entire second-hand market is going to die based off one rumour. The second-hand market isn't defunct. It's still there. But now, it won't hurt devs and the industry as much. How is that at all a bad thing?

Used games don't make them lose any more money than used movies and music make those industries lose money -- it's a fallacious argument with zero credible evidence to substantiate it.

Yes there is...

http://gamepolitics.com/2011/05/18/fable-iii-developer-calls-used-games-market-worse-piracy

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13506_3-20022957-17.html

http://www.industrygamers.com/news/used-game-sales-forcing-devs-into-multiplayer-to-survive-says-dyack/

http://thegamershub.net/2011/07/used-game-sales-are-only-hurting-us-says-insomniac-developer/

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-12-13-fallout-new-vegas-dev-hopes-digital-distribution-stabs-used-game-market-in-the-heart

http://www.joystiq.com/2011/09/12/heavy-rain-developer-estimates-13m-loss-on-second-hand-sales/

There's a few instances, and there's a lot more knocking around. And I work for a developer. I see first hand the statistics of how much estimated revenue is lost because of used game sales, and it's a lot.

So we're all wrong, but you're right? Right?

Icarus4578
01-28-2012, 11:25 AM
I didn't just make anything up -- the rumor makes it very clear that they intend to make the next gen a one-game-per-console thing whereby you must register each individual game to each individual console in order to play, thereby destroying the used game market.

KingOfSentinels
01-28-2012, 11:30 AM
It's a rumour. There's no proof it's going to happen, whereas I have just proved flat-out to you used game sales hurt developers, which tbh, I thought was common knowledge. You really think you know more about the Industry than the people who actually comprise it?

Icarus4578
01-28-2012, 11:34 AM
It's a rumor which has yet to be disproven.

Icarus4578
01-28-2012, 11:35 AM
Yes there is...

http://gamepolitics.com/2011/05/18/fable-iii-developer-calls-used-games-market-worse-piracy

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13506_3-20022957-17.html

http://www.industrygamers.com/news/used-game-sales-forcing-devs-into-multiplayer-to-survive-says-dyack/

http://thegamershub.net/2011/07/used-game-sales-are-only-hurting-us-says-insomniac-developer/

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-12-13-fallout-new-vegas-dev-hopes-digital-distribution-stabs-used-game-market-in-the-heart

http://www.joystiq.com/2011/09/12/heavy-rain-developer-estimates-13m-loss-on-second-hand-sales/

There's a few instances, and there's a lot more knocking around. And I work for a developer. I see first hand the statistics of how much estimated revenue is lost because of used game sales, and it's a lot.

So we're all wrong, but you're right? Right?

Wrong. This is mostly just hogwash coming solely from corporate perspective.

KingOfSentinels
01-28-2012, 11:37 AM
It's also yet to be proven, too.

And lol, Jesus Christ. You really think you know more than all these developers and can just write off what they say? How ignorant can you actually be? Very, it seems.

darren
01-28-2012, 11:37 AM
Interesting. I just went on both Gamespot.co.uk and Gamespot.com and compared the prices for Batman ~ Arkham City. In the UK it is 29.97 and in the US it's $59.99 ($54.99 used). The current exchange rate is 1 US dollar = 0.6360 British pounds sterling (1 US dollar = 0.7572 euros). IOW, they're about the same across the board.


who said anything about gamestop uk?? they dont even have any stores i think .

i know how much i paid nuff said, i also know how much UK store charge for there games .. you how ever do not.

last time you was here buying game???.

i only have to look at cheapassgamer

BF3 24 RRP original rrp was 50
Assassin's Creed: Revelations (PS3) 23.95 - original RRP 50
Dead Island (PC) 9.99 - original rrp 30
Sonic Generations (PS3) 8.99 - original RRP 40
Warhammer 40k: Space Marine (PS3) 9.85 - original RRP 40
Dark Souls (360) 14.95 original RRP 40-45
Deus Ex: Human Revolution (PC) 7.99 - original RRP 40 .

i got my kids copies of ULTIMATE MARVEL VS CAPCOM 3 on xbox the other day 10 .. original RRP just b4 xmas 40 ..

games here drop in price for a bit then go up , then go down again .. if people could be arsed to wait they get them cheaper. FACT


OHHH . i have Mass Effect 3 on PRE ORDER for 27.99 ... the RRP is 40 ..


And you're in a position to tell others that they shouldn't be allowed to purchase second-hand goods?


no but i'm in a good postion to say to anyone that is so hard up as you like to paint it that they dont have a pot to piss in .. dont buy fucking video games .. i will never give a shit if someone cant afford a video game or dvd or what ever and nor shoudl i ever be expected to .. i DO care how if they cant afford to eat, but if those opt for video games over food well tbh fuck them too.

The second-hand market isn't defunct. It's still there. But now, it won't hurt devs and the industry as much. How is that at all a bad thing?

its not a bad thing .. unless you cant afford the online pass, then they will moan there ass off .. funny thing is tbh .. you will probebly find that buy the time you have paid for an older game 2nd hand then maybe paid for the online pass you could have got a retail version for the same price new.

for example Warhammer 40k: Space Marine (PS3) 9.85 new online .. today in town it was 25 second hand in ipswich and 40 new ..

Alucard
01-28-2012, 11:39 AM
I sure this has been mentioned before but I couldn't be bothered to read through all that crap to see. There are quite a few games that are impossible to find new or have a very small number of units at release making some games impossible to play ever... if this was to come into force.


I did, but the others ignored it because its a valid point they cant knock back. What everyone doesnt realize is the console industry NEEDS used games to be able to thrive as it does. You remove that and it'll be sales on par with the pc. All thoseimpulse buyers that buy everything day 1, they wont be there. Console game sales go low, developers bitch about the amount being sold, turn on pirates as their main reason for this, and start adding in more and more DRM.

The fact that anyone thinks removing used games from the console market is good for them personally is a laugh. Me, I'm fucking looking forward to it to see it turn out exactly like I've said. What? They've stopped selling that JRPG you were after being the company only made 100k? Too bad for you.

Escaflowne2001
01-28-2012, 11:42 AM
Lead Fable III combat designer Mike West thinks the used games market is much worse for developers than having your game pirated.

LOL, seriously.

Anyway I see it's mainly the companies that make average/poor games that speak against the used games market though. Most likely because there the sorts of games that people avoid buying new and still would regardless.

darren
01-28-2012, 11:48 AM
yeah that is kinda dumb from Mike West, i wouldnt waste a dvdr on fable 3

Icarus4578
01-28-2012, 11:49 AM
I'll close by saying this: If the rumor is true, enjoy your restrictive, locked-down platform. I'll ignore their platform.

KingOfSentinels
01-28-2012, 11:51 AM
Mike West was stupid to say it's worse than piracy, but perfectly valid in saying it hurts the studio. Peter Molyneux said the same as him actually. Maybe Fable 3 didn't get pirated much because it wasn't worth pirating?

Alucard
01-28-2012, 12:11 PM
If you're all for championing the developer, why not go picket the publishers who steal majority of the money from the game sales from the people who actually make it? How about you go hassle Rockstar for not paying Team Bondi a dollar for LA Nior before they fired the whole dev studio so they could take all the profits? How about you hassle Activision for not paying Infinity Ward employees for COD4?

Publishers fuck over developers 100 times more then any used game does.

KingOfSentinels
01-28-2012, 12:17 PM
I think publishers are disgraceful when they do stuff like that. I don't see where that came from, or how you thought I'd be okay with it? The Team Bondi thing is the worst when I read about that, and I had an Interview to work for Rockstar North too. Glad they didn't pick me, what with all the horrible stories I've heard.

And that may be so, but as people say, 50% of something is better than 100% of nothing. A lot of developers wouldn't even get a chance to make their games without publisher funding. I don't agree with it at all, but it's a necessary evil. Not every developer has enough money on their own to stay private like Valve. One day maybe we can get rid of the big bad publishers completely, but that day is a long way away unfortunately. Devs do choose to go with publishers after all.

Whereas used gaming is not necessary. There's a big difference and I don't know why you brought that up at all.

Alucard
01-28-2012, 04:50 PM
Unfortunately we wont do away with publishers if all the rules are bent in their favour, you being one of them more then happy to give them more power. Plenty of developers get screwed every day. Obsidian has been half raped over time and frequently at that. But like I said, before you start backing up the publishers and their desire to own every single dollar they can from something they never created, you should first back the developers to get their power back.

It never used to be like this. Developers used to have the power with the publishers chasing after them begging for the opportunity to publish their games. Its shit like this that keeps the publishers where they are, in a seat of power. It'll be different now with indie scenes getting more and more stronger. A few developers have already broken free of their publishers chains to work solo for the highest bidder under their own terms, or just release stuff on their own through online distribution. Side with Valve or Stardock and get their backing to release games. With luck more and more will do this. I'll support anything that fucks over the publisher and gives them less power.

The best part about this is its a win win situation. Leave the used games industry in, publishers get less returns because of resales. Remove the used games scene, impulse buying first week also stops since the people know they cant return games anymore, less titles sold, publisher loses out both ways. And a big fuck you to the publishers from me.

spider-prime
01-28-2012, 11:59 PM
Mike West was stupid to say it's worse than piracy, but perfectly valid in saying it hurts the studio. Peter Molyneux said the same as him actually. Maybe Fable 3 didn't get pirated much because it wasn't worth pirating?

In a way, is he stupid? When you think about it, people who pirate things are more than likely never going to buy the thing they pirated. But someone who buys the game used still bought the game when they could have bought it brand new instead.
Used games buyers are the legal consumer that they want to control, cause they know they can't control the illusive illegal pirate!

They can't stop pirating like they have hoped with DRMs and suing people. So go to the next best thing.

eastx
01-29-2012, 01:04 AM
6 pages of arguing with Icarus while he sticks his thumbs in his ears and ignores the crap out of whatever intelligent arguments you make.... I thought we all agreed to stop talking when he tries to argue.

Icarus4578
01-29-2012, 08:58 AM
eastx, no matter what the discussion or debate is about, if I'm involved, you can't help but make some condescending post about me, all the while contributing absolutely nothing of relevance.

eastx
01-29-2012, 09:36 AM
eastx, no matter what the discussion or debate is about, if I'm involved, you can't help but make some condescending post about me, all the while contributing absolutely nothing of relevance.

LOL, OK Icarus. You win at arguing. :clap:

Northeastmonk
01-29-2012, 11:31 PM
Heavy Rain, basically everyone who wanted to play it somehow waited to get a hand me down copy no offence. But building a gamers physical library should sound great and all. But the sheer amount of money you have to pay if you keep that going is crazy (no offence bc I have my own collection). I dont know if PC is a sure match because a console is more accessable to those with a larger budget to spend, but the PC selection at GameStop is so small and their the only ones with no trade-in value. Plus GameStop has to pay the cost of shipping 100+ game copies in which no used sells went to buy. I think their account would dry up quick.

Escaflowne2001
01-30-2012, 05:32 AM
Kingdom of Amular developer had this to say
"The industry is in a very odd place," he said. "The data coming in on used game sales is not saying the things many thought it should, or would. But companies are still trying to figure out how to receive dollars spent on games they make, when they are bought. Is that wrong? if so please tell me how.

"Again, you can argue with methods, or process, and you absolutely can bitch and gripe about ANY DAY 1 DLC you are charged for, because I think I agree with many on that, but we are trying to create something here, product and company wise, and it takes dollars to do that."

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-01-30-curt-schilling-defends-kingdoms-of-amalur-reckoning-online-pass

spider-prime
01-30-2012, 06:14 AM
If we're not buying their shit, then yes they are wrong. Your business sense should change to what the people want, not what you want.

Steam should be a perfect example of what people want.......... CHEAPER GAMES! When I buy a game cheap, I love buying DLC for it cause I feel it's justify cause I didn't spend 60-70 dollars on a game.

I bought all the DLC to orcs must die on PC when steam had them on sale and same with magicka, I got every single one with the game for around 5 dollars.

sites like cheapass gamer should be another example of people wanting cheaper games, they get millions of hits every month.

darren
01-30-2012, 06:20 AM
hmmm i would hardly call steam cheap ..

Batman AC 40 to download 20 to buy the retail, skyrims about the same different .. yes it 100% has good sales .. BUT its far from cheap when it comes to the newer stuff infact its a bit of a con quite often

Drunken Savior
01-30-2012, 06:49 AM
Batman AC 40 to download 20 to buy the retail, skyrims about the same different .. yes it 100% has good sales .. BUT its far from cheap when it comes to the newer stuff infact its a bit of a con quite often

For reals. Most of my Steam games are retail that I've linked to the account. I pick up most of my new games around Thanksgiving/Holidays. That's when I can easily find recent releases selling for real cheap online. Arkham City (1 month old at the time) was $28 during Amazon's Black Friday event. Dozens of sales.

But Steam sales are golden. I'm willing to bet we could all list games we've gotten on a steam sale we have yet to play. Sometimes they make it more convenient for you to buy packages of games.

But new games? Nah. For some reason Steam's store rarely, if ever, has sales for brand new games.

KingOfSentinels
01-30-2012, 06:51 AM
Yeah Steam is expensive as hell. Ignoring Indie games, 90% of my games I nab off Steam were reduced somehow, since they are a bit of a rip-off full priced. I only buy the occasional full price games that deserve it and developers I like. Portal 2, Deus Ex: HR, and Witcher 2 were among the few last year. I like them on my Steam.

But yup, I agree with him. There's absolutely nothing wrong with them wanting to make money off used game sales, they're perfectly in their own right to want to make money off a product they made. It's a much easier way than screwing over buying customers with crappy DRM, we should be happy it's like that.

He did make a funny point that if they'd called it Day 1 DLC, no one would be whining this much. :P

Escaflowne2001
01-30-2012, 07:04 AM
Out of interest have any of the big publishers/developers like EA, Activision, Capcom etc ever mentioned used game sales? or is it mostly little developers who's games usually get passed over for one reason or another.

KingOfSentinels
01-30-2012, 07:37 AM
Off the top of my head, I know Capcom has. Remember the feature in Mercenaries 3D where you couldn't over-write your saves? Yeah, that was them trying to curb used game sales. EA has the 'Project $10' which is all about combating used game sales, which was basically the online pass, and Ubisoft are doing that too. Dunno about Activision. They've mentioned it but since most of their games get like 5 DLC packs, people who buy used probably buy them so they're okay in that regard.

Publishers need to be a lot more careful than developers do in what they say, is why they don't get as publicised against it and are a lot less out spoken, but yeah, it's not just little developers; though I wouldn't call most of the developers who have come out against used sales 'little'.

spider-prime
01-30-2012, 08:09 AM
hmmm i would hardly call steam cheap ..

Batman AC 40 to download 20 to buy the retail, skyrims about the same different .. yes it 100% has good sales .. BUT its far from cheap when it comes to the newer stuff infact its a bit of a con quite often

Sorry, I more meant when they do their sales. Guess I should have pointed that part out.

But companies don't need to do serial numbers, DRMs, online passes to make money or to prevent piracy.

In game Ads is probably the best way to go that doesn't annoy the consumer and will probably make them more money a month than what online passes do on used games.

All you have to do is put it in the main menu and multiplayer menu just like Uncharted 3 did with their UTV function, put ads in the little box.

darren
01-30-2012, 09:04 AM
oh yeah the sales are great .. but recently i'v found green man gamign sales better .. funny thing is i'v been getting games from them which is just a steam code ... i go to steam to get it .. and steam are selling it for me..

Icarus4578
01-30-2012, 09:07 AM
When somebody sells their used car, the car manufacturer doesn't make extra profit. When somebody sells their used music albums, the label/artist doesn't make a penny. When somebody sells their used movies, the movie studios don't make any profit. Etc. Etc.

Game developers can moan and groan all day about how they were the ones responsible for creating said products and how (in their minds) they're entitled to all subsequent profits but in reality they're not entitled to anything beyond the first-sale. So what are they trying to do? Punish businesses which sell second-hand goods and consumers who may purchase those goods by locking the software to each respective platform. This is a draconian measure meant to destroy the second-hand market and take control of the product after the consumer has already purchased it. It's like saying, "Ok, you may've bought our game but it doesn't really belong to you."

KingOfSentinels
01-30-2012, 11:46 AM
There's no way those industries can stop that though. People's DVD players and CD players aren't online, so there's not much the music and film industry can do to stop it all, unless they resort to extremely draconic forms of DRM which would never work. But the videogame industry does have the ability to benefit from used game sales, and they're perfectly in their right to do so. Simply putting in a pass to access a bit more of the game is not a bad thing and nowhere near as draconian as some of the things PC gamers have had to put up with for years on end. Console gamers should be fucking happy they don't have to jump through the hoops we sometimes have to.

These passes aren't at all that obtrusive and won't effect the majority of player's game experiences, and at the same time will ensure developers get the money they deserve for making a game. If you're a fan of videogames and love the industry, you shouldn't be complaining about this. Sure we could live without out, but there's worse things developers can put in their games e.g. some of the DRM PC gets. I like to support developers I love by actually giving them my money. Not like every game might get this, and the needing a pass to unlock the entire singleplayer is most likely bolicks. The offline userbase is just too big for it to ever work yet.

People have to get it out of their heads the second-hand market will die completely from one little rumour which has no proof and when most people are saying is not true.

Also Icarus I love how you continue to delude yourself into thinking you know more about the Industry than the developers do, and that every single business is evil. You must work for a charity or something.

Icarus4578
01-30-2012, 12:32 PM
So what if you work for a developer. The developers are only looking out for their own interests, so it's only natural that you tow the corporate line and defend their practices, no matter how draconian. Once I purchase a game, be it new or used, I should be able to play the full game without phoning home to Microsoft or whomever and paying an additional fee for some stupid registration code which would then give me permission to run the software I paid for on my console.

It's bad enough how crooked game companies have become what with them locking/withholding content and then making people pay via microtransactions, to say nothing about DRM protection schemes. To the developer it's all about their bottom line; they're going to find every way possible to nickel and dime the consumer. This is abusive, restrictive behavior, no matter how you try to white-wash it.

darren
01-30-2012, 01:43 PM
So what if you work for a developer. The developers are only looking out for their own interests, so it's only natural that you tow the corporate line and defend their practices, no matter how draconian. .

Kings mate .. best bet is not bother .. we know this type of stuff is just retarded .. my advice .. deep breath and walk away .. he's not worth it.


It's bad enough how crooked game companies have become what with them locking/withholding content and then making people pay via microtransactions.

what a pile of horse shit .. the only people to BLAME are the dicks that paid in the first place .. if no one had paid for bloody horse armor it might not have happened ..

its as dumb as blaming the tv companies for doing PPV sport events .. if people were not stupid enough to pay for them they wouldnt keep doing them ..

most of the times its the consumer utter stupidity to pay for it in the first place the problem not the company thinking of way to make more money. thats who you should be venting it at .. utter utter half wits that keep payign for all this shit not the business men making money as they have found a user base fucking stupid enough to keep paying for it.

To the developer it's all about their bottom line; they're going to find every way possible to nickel and dime the consumer. isn't that the whole point of business?? they are not charities and its always been the same .. just with the internet they have found new ways to make money out of idiots that lap up new hats for 3 a go .. cant blame them really if people are stupid enough to keep paying .. i'd keep taking the money from them as well

KingOfSentinels
01-30-2012, 02:54 PM
So what if you work for a developer. The developers are only looking out for their own interests, so it's only natural that you tow the corporate line and defend their practices, no matter how draconian.

Funnily enough, no. Only when I agree with it. And in this instance, I agree entirely with what the pass does and what it accomplishes. I can have a different opinion to you, believe it or not.

It'd be easier to just laugh at you for thinking that, and believe me I did laugh when first reading that. Might just start doing that more, you do give me plenty opportunities to just laugh at you. Is nice.

It's bad enough how crooked game companies have become what with them locking/withholding content and then making people pay via microtransactions, to say nothing about DRM protection schemes.

Darren summed it up pretty nicely. If no one bought the shit, it would have stopped ages ago. Vote with your wallet, as people say. Maybe you don't want the online passes, but I know most people who probably couldn't give a fuck about them. They either buy new, or will buy them used with no interest in the online modes or the additional content if that single-player pass jumps into more games. No one is demanding you buy it.

To the developer it's all about their bottom line; they're going to find every way possible to nickel and dime the consumer. This is abusive, restrictive behavior, no matter how you try to white-wash it.

You constantly exaggerate every little thing...

See, there's a big difference between what you described, and what is actually happening.

When developers with-hold content and sell it later as DLC, that's trying to squeeze as much money out of you as possible. That's a given, that's exactly what they're trying to do there, there's basically no reason why a developer should hold back content only to then sell unless they just want to make more money.

But the passes is them trying to make back the money they're practically owed. You're buying their game, and yet no money goes to them for it. How is that fair? They have every single right to want to have that money, and it's perfectly justifiable, whether you like it or not. Lots of developers actually with-hold content and put them into DLC as a form of this online pass; people who buy the game used will then buy the DLC, and that money goes to the developer. It's a way of them to make money off of it. And it's practically exactly the same as what's happening here, so I don't know why such a fuss has been kicked over it.

People can have different opinions, you don't need to argue against everyone's opinion just because it isn't yours. I just believe that if you buy a game, a developer should see some of that money.

Alucard
01-30-2012, 03:46 PM
Console gamers gonna get raaaped, gonna get raaaaaped, and KOS is going to enjoy the raaaaape when it finally goes from dating to raaaaape. Oh you know its coming. Thank you publisher for your greediness, yes I am more then happy to buy a new console because this one is dated before aug3 which is an old version and easily hackable so I dont want you to lose out on money so my new system is on its way and I'm rebuying all my games again because I have to, and will rebuy them 3months later because they're all on a timer.

Oh you may scoff and mock what I said but when it happens I'm sending you flowers.

KingOfSentinels
01-30-2012, 04:04 PM
I will scoff and mock anything people say when it's something stupid and based off nothing more than a rumour, especially when they then ridiculously over-exaggerate it up to the point I just end up face palming. So don't mind if I do. :smile2:

*scoffs and mocks*

You play PC anyway, we've survived this long with CD keys and absolutely no used-game market, consoles could do it as well no problem. So the worse case scenario isn't even that bad. But as I've said, it'll most likely not come to that. The offline userbase of the consoles is still just too big for online authentication to really kick off, publishers aren't going to try it until those numbers climb up. At the end of 2010, offline and online systems were split relatively half and half on Xbox and PS3. No publisher will risk cutting their sales in half because of needing a pass to play the entire game.

This, along with digital distribution, will help developers stop losing money from the used game market. Not greedy to want the money you deserve.

zechin
01-30-2012, 04:24 PM
I don't think you're getting Icarus' argument which I can understand and agree with. And I can see yours which I also agree with.

Time to post a long long analysis and rant for fun at 7am in the morning.

And this is me as a consumer speaking. But the fact that they want to nickel and dime from second hand, after a purchase has already been made isn't exactly a 'sound' prospect. Icarus already addressed this with his second-hand cars and other examples.

When we buy stuff, we buy to 'own' it. Sure if you're the manufacturer/developer you would like to see that return. But that cost has already been justified. I don't really care about retail companies selling used because I usually buy every single game 'new' anyway.

I hate to bring Apple into this as an example (because we've been discussing them alot lately). But It's the reason why Steve Jobs didn't want to do the monthly subscription for 'unlimited music' shenanigan. Because people like to own their music. And if you don't see the point im getting to here. It's that once someone buys, then proceeds to own the game. They can do as they see fit.

Here's an outlandish example, which may or may not apply. If someone sold a second-hand movie to you, you pop it in via a garage sale(what a bargain you think). And via some new technology it now requires some new form of authentication. So that, it only plays 40 minutes of the movie. You would now be required to purchase the rest of the movie. Because you now own a second-hand blu-ray or DVD(that technically doesn't belong to you). Most people would think oh well, i'll shell out that 5 extra bucks. But the principle at hand is that many feel they should own the DVD/Blu-Ray after having already purchased it 'used' from a garage sale or retailer.

And yes the Developer can do as they see fit by charging via DLC(to make returns). But that doesn't mean 'second hand' is a bad thing. Which is what alot of these companies are making it out to be. Spider-Prime is right about doing advertisements. I can see from a business perspective it is justifiable within means to make money from it still. But yes, I can understand that it sucks if one of these game retail companies sell for a marked up price, making its money from a used game sale and the developer never sees any of it. But that's their business.

That's what happens when you're publicly owned. You have to suck cock and say 'this is how many games I sold, my penis is now bigger than yours. So stockholders, please invest in me more!'. To make yourself look more valuable as a company and stay afloat.

This is what I imagine most people see when online DRM is required.

At the end of the day, we can sell our NES,SNES,GBA,NDS,Playstation 1 & 2, Sega etc etc with their respective games and confidently say we owned those games. And let's say a billionaire decides to buy that collection in the future. He plays Atari/NES games here and there. One day, he decides to pop in a 360 game and it goes. 'You own this game second hand, please pay us an extra 10 bucks to get the full experience!'. Even the billionaire will be thinking, 'my ass is hurting.'

As a PC enthusiast. The CD-key has always worked well for me. If you make a compelling multiplayer experience such as Valve(CS:S) or Blizzard (WC3, Diablo 2, Starcraft). These games require a cd-key to activate multiplayer. That for me is enough incentive to buy a game. For me this has always been a driving factor to purchasing the game, just so I can play on battle.net or headshot people in Counter Strike on a dedicated server. Because I want access to battle.net or that better server! Only if you pirated the game you would have only played the singleplayer, but multiplayer features were locked out.

KingOfSentinels
01-30-2012, 05:14 PM
If someone sold a second-hand movie to you, you pop it in via a garage sale(what a bargain you think). And via some new technology it now requires some new form of authentication. So that, it only plays 40 minutes of the movie. You would now be required to purchase the rest of the movie. Because you now own a second-hand blu-ray or DVD(that technically doesn't belong to you).

That would be annoying, very true, but that's not really what's happening here.

This is more akin to buying a second-hand movie, and watching the entire movie, and then requiring a form of authentication to get some deleted scenes, or out-takes, or other extra features you get on DVDs. You can still watch the entire movie perfectly well with nothing intruding on that experience, but if you want that extra bit, you support the director (or whoever the money would go to for a movie :P) and buy it.

And I think it's perfectly acceptable for developers to want that to occur. I don't know why people wouldn't like that. Nothing is forcing you to buy it, but if you enjoyed the game and want more, you support the developer and give them the money. Both parties win. It's like you just bought some DLC.

I'd like to stress for what feels like the billionth time that the entire game is unlikely to get locked out by a pass system on the consoles. If that ever happened I definitely wouldn't agree with it, but I can argue against it because I can't see it ever coming to light. If it ever does, don't buy the game, and it'll go away. Simple. That's exactly what I'd do, and exactly what I will do if the unlikely happened and that started hitting lots of titles. Too many people whine about stuff then go ahead and buy it. Hey Xbox Gamers, do you enjoy paying for Xbox Live? They tried to make PC players pay for it once too, but because no one bought it, they made it free! Funny that. And it still sucks! But we get the suckage for free now.

But a pass to unlock additional content un-related to the main game, or a pass to unlock the multiplayer portion of a game, I find perfectly justified.

But that doesn't mean 'second hand' is a bad thing. Which is what alot of these companies are making it out to be.

They make it out to be because it really is, unfortunately. The industry isn't just blowing something out of proportion; on PC, piracy is a huge problem. So many people pirate games now that drastic measures need to be taken to try and stop it. But it's so hard to stop, these measures harm paying customers more than the pirates, and so people just end up hating it all.

On consoles, there is way more used game sales than piracy. Both effect a developer in exactly the same way; it's a loss of a sale. Now though piracy is of course ethically bad and illegal, whereas used game sales aren't, developers are companies, and like it or not, they want and need to make money in order to survive and keep bringing you games. So they're naturally going to go after what loses them the most money now that they can, and it just so happens what loses them the most money is the easiest thing to solve.

Every company would do that. If the movie industry and music industry could both do the it, they'd do the same in a heartbeat.

It's just the fact that used game sales isn't a bad thing to do, and so people think they're unjustly picking on a legit way of obtaining the game. Just so happens while that may be so, the people buying used are costing the developer millions, and no business is a business if they'll let millions and millions of revenue slip by them. And unlike what Icarus thinks, that doesn't make them evil. :crazy:

Now there are pros to used gaming, which is why, again, I believe people crying it's going to be abolished are just over-reacting. People will no longer buy the games Day 1 just to sell, and that might dent sales by a tad. And so these passes allow people to continue to do that, while the people who then buy these used copies just have to give a little bit to support the developer.

Kiuju2k
01-30-2012, 05:19 PM
Well digital distribution. If they can come up with a model and can sell their content at competitive prices, then boom case closed or solved or whatever. The console makers are the gatekeepers, they just need to work with them. This won't abolish the used game industry, but they can at least see some kind of profit down the line.

KingOfSentinels
01-30-2012, 05:40 PM
That's been my point. Developers don't want to abolish the used game market, they just want to actually see some of that money for themselves. No one is the bad guy; you're not the bad guy for being the used game, but neither are the developer for wanting some profit from that game you just bought.

If Steam brought their prices down from full-priced RRP, I would kiss buying games at retail goodbye. :D

Nintendo's new Network is being designed to be able to distribute full games after a time, and the Wii U is catering to that with USB external HDD support and shit. I won't be surprised if all games start to become digitally available across all platforms with next generation.

eastx
01-31-2012, 12:40 AM
Console gamers gonna get raaaped, gonna get raaaaaped, and KOS is going to enjoy the raaaaape when it finally goes from dating to raaaaape. Oh you know its coming. Thank you publisher for your greediness, yes I am more then happy to buy a new console because this one is dated before aug3 which is an old version and easily hackable so I dont want you to lose out on money so my new system is on its way and I'm rebuying all my games again because I have to, and will rebuy them 3months later because they're all on a timer.

Oh you may scoff and mock what I said but when it happens I'm sending you flowers.

This is one of the dumbest things you've ever typed. You should either be ashamed or proud, I don't know. It's weird how sometimes you come across like a rational, intelligent person, and yet other times we get this from you.

Also, everything KOS has been saying is entirely right and logical. Good job KOS, though I don't know why you bother trying to reason with Wax Wing Head. He will never, ever get it.

Alucard
01-31-2012, 03:16 AM
This is one of the dumbest things you've ever typed. You should either be ashamed or proud, I don't know. It's weird how sometimes you come across like a rational, intelligent person, and yet other times we get this from you.

Also, everything KOS has been saying is entirely right and logical. Good job KOS, though I don't know why you bother trying to reason with Wax Wing Head. He will never, ever get it.


I'm totally exaggerating. So I guess I should feel proud since you werent sure.

Also publishers can fuck off until developers get the vast majority of the thanks/profits/control. Thats how it should be. So championing the publishers, while ignoring the absolute rapage of the developer, in my eyes is a dumb thing.

spider-prime
01-31-2012, 04:21 AM
The problem is if the consumer doesn't like it, they will bypass it and go to another console if the next Xbox is only new games with passes only.

If the PS3 gets the same games but without it or the Wii U, they will go buy that console and games for it instead.

It's why most games sell better on the console than on the PC, people don't want to deal with the extra baggage. Skyrim, for example, sold the best on the xbox and then Playstation and then PC. Console games hate installs, cd keys, DRMs, etc. Which is why they buy games that are better on the PC still on console. Same with Call of Duty.

darren
01-31-2012, 04:29 AM
PS3 with 100% have passes .. Twisted Metal is getting them from what i read to take it online

spider-prime
01-31-2012, 04:34 AM
I more mean every game has it, not just some of them and those are still just for online only modes and I mean if Xbox did it that needed it to play the entire game.

Icarus4578
01-31-2012, 09:06 AM
I'll have to grit my teeth and agree with your arguments, darren and KongOfSnetinels, because I cannot deny that what you're saying is true. Yes, the consumers allowed for this microtransaction model to succeed; if nobody supported it, it would've gone away. That still doesn't make it right in my mind but that's the direction the industry is taking.

I don't know, maybe I'm just spoiled by past generations and don't want to watch the console industry degenerate into a heavily-regulated atmosphere along the lines of what PC gaming has become. But if it's coming, it's coming, and there's not much I can do about it aside from vote 'no' with my wallet. I can take solace in knowing that I'm not the only one who's going to turn away from MS's products should that rumor hold true.